fireemblemfandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Fenrir
I added the stats for the SNES games, Fenrir does not appear in 1-3, but does in 4 and 5. I added a small portion stating it was a long range magic in those games. I also edited FE6s usage, it said it had 20 uses, when in fact it has 13 (odd, but that's what it is). Shouldn't the GBA Fenrir have it's own page? "In the Japanese versions of the GBA games, this tome is known as Nosferatu (ノスフェラート Nosuferāto), and may only be used within one or two tiles away from a given target. This spell is described to conjure "Freezing Flames" upon being cast." If it has a different name in japanese and does a completely different thing, I think it is a different tome...? Even if it doesn't need its own page the little clipped I put above should be changed as it suggests it is the same tome. The main thing is, from what I can tell, is that they have nothing in common aside from the localizers happened to name it the same name as a tome that came before it. Or am I missing something obvious here that suggests they are the same tome? ._. L95 (talk) 13:54, August 11, 2013 (UTC) :I'm not sure what the hang-up is, help me to understand. It's not unheard of to have a given tome or weapon to share a name, but have different properties across FE games. It just so happens that this tome, in Japanese only, mind you, has the same name of a different tome, which in English is "Nosferatu". :So, we have a page for Fenrir and a page for Nosferatu. Help me to understand what is wrong with the situation and what you feel should be done about it. Because I'm having a hard time seeing it.--Aivass Remurias (talk) 07:14, August 13, 2013 (UTC) Well, we have Rezire, Nosferatu and Fenrir, three different spells. (using japanese names here) Rezire drains health, Nosferatu is a powerful close range attack, and Fenrir is a long range attack. Why is Nosferatu grouped with Fenrir when the only similarity they seem to have is the fact that the localizers made two of those spells share a name in the english version? Say, if we used nothing but japanese names on the wiki, then they should all have their own pages, correct? I can't think of a better way to explain it, and I may just be looking at it wrong. I was thinking a different page for JPNosferatu(Fenrir (GBA)?), but that does seem stupid. At the least the Fenrir page shouldn't treat them like the exact same spell, I was thinking two sections, but I don't know if that is acceptable. But IDK. XD If you still don't get it maybe there isn't an issue and I'm just looking at it too hard. L95 (talk) 12:45, August 13, 2013 (UTC) :I think part of the problem is taken care of simply because we actually don't just use Japanese names for the wiki, unless that's all we have, due to unreleased media. Don't get me wrong, though, your concern may have some merit, it's just that I can't quite see it. I'd really like it if Otherarrow, Aveyn Knight, Engweimin, et. al. decided to weigh in on this.--Aivass Remurias (talk) 21:11, August 13, 2013 (UTC) :Yeah, there might be something that's yet to be untangled here. I'm just not sure right now what it is or what to do about it. Adding a section?--Aivass Remurias (talk) 05:20, August 23, 2013 (UTC) ::I'd just leave the spells combined to be honest. I'm pretty sure there are tons of instances of this on the wiki, where things are named differently in the Japanese version and then "combined" in the English version or the other way round. So long as there's a note about it on the page, that's good enough I think. BTW, GBA Fenrir/Nosferatu is actually called Fenrir in the game code, so there is some connection at least.--Aveyn Knight (talk) 19:58, August 23, 2013 (UTC) :::Sounds good to me, at least. Agreed.--Aivass Remurias (talk) 23:06, August 23, 2013 (UTC)